Filed: Oct. 10, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: HLD-003 NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _ No. 11-4423 _ IN RE: JOHN DOUGLAS PARKER, Petitioner _ On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Related to E.D. Pa. Crim. No. 5-08-cr-00534-001) _ Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. December 22, 2011 Before: McKEE, Chief Judge, ALDISERT and GARTH, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: October 10, 2012) _ OPINION _ PER CURIAM Petitioner Joh
Summary: HLD-003 NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _ No. 11-4423 _ IN RE: JOHN DOUGLAS PARKER, Petitioner _ On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Related to E.D. Pa. Crim. No. 5-08-cr-00534-001) _ Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. December 22, 2011 Before: McKEE, Chief Judge, ALDISERT and GARTH, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: October 10, 2012) _ OPINION _ PER CURIAM Petitioner John..
More
HLD-003 NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 11-4423 ___________ IN RE: JOHN DOUGLAS PARKER, Petitioner ____________________________________ On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Related to E.D. Pa. Crim. No. 5-08-cr-00534-001) ____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. December 22, 2011 Before: McKEE, Chief Judge, ALDISERT and GARTH, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: October 10, 2012) _________ OPINION _________ PER CURIAM Petitioner John Douglas Parker filed a petition for writ of mandamus on December 15, 2011, asking us to order the District Court to render a decision on his motion to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Parker’s § 2255 motion, filed in July 2010, had been ripe for disposition since October 2010. By order entered December 19, 2011, the District Court dismissed Parker’s § 2255 motion, declined to issue a certificate of appealability, and closed Parker’s case. Because the District Court granted Parker the relief he requested in his mandamus petition—a decision on his § 2255 motion—his mandamus petition has been rendered moot, and we will deny it accordingly. 2
